Draft Option #7: Trade it!

[dudacek]

The Jets will have $25 million available to re-sign Laine, Connor and Trouba, and replace Myers and Hayes and will have to pay Morrisey big money next summer. Could #7 be in play in a deal for Ehlers?

We know the issues with the Leafs. As much as I despise the idea, what about a package involving Nazem Kadri? For the record, I couldn’t trade 7 to the Leafs under any realistic circumstances. Couldn’t take the chance of Dach or Zegras haunting me for a decade.

Edited April 11, 2019 by dudacek

[TrueBlueGED]

25 minutes ago, dudacek said:

The Jets will have $25 million available to re-sign Laine, Connor and Trouba, and replace Myers and Hayes and will have to pay Morrisey big money next summer. Could #7 be in play in a deal for Ehlers?

We know the issues with the Leafs. As much as I despise the idea, what about a package involving Nazem Kadri? For the record, I couldn’t trade 7 to the Leafs under any realistic circumstances. Couldn’t take the chance of Dach or Zegras haunting me for a decade.

Bring...me...EHLERS!!! 

(Hi NS) 

48 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I'm not going to agree. Unless we trade 7 for what i've already say 20 times. 23 or younger with a ceiling equal to what 7 can be. 

Then I suspect you won't be frequenting this thread. 

[Derrico]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

The Jets will have $25 million available to re-sign Laine, Connor and Trouba, and replace Myers and Hayes and will have to pay Morrisey big money next summer. Could #7 be in play in a deal for Ehlers?

We know the issues with the Leafs. As much as I despise the idea, what about a package involving Nazem Kadri? For the record, I couldn’t trade 7 to the Leafs under any realistic circumstances. Couldn’t take the chance of Dach or Zegras haunting me for a decade.

Firstly, you cannot mention Ehlers and get NS going.....

Secondly, if you are suggesting we trade 7 to the Leafs for Nazim Kadri than you can just ***** right off (but don't really do that because your an excellent poster).

[IKnowPhysics]

More years of missing playoffs is unacceptable.  We have serious needs on the team right now.  It is worthwhile to gauge interest form other teams to leverage this serious asset for roster players that fill those needs contribute to this team for years to come.

The scouts know best about the types of players available at 7, and what the other plateaus look like in the first round.  I would be fine with taking the pick, trading down, or trading for established young players that will help us.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

1 hour ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Bring...me...EHLERS!!! 

(Hi NS) 

Then I suspect you won't be frequenting this thread. 

EHLERS!!

?

20 minutes ago, Derrico said:

Firstly, you cannot mention Ehlers and get NS going.....

Secondly, if you are suggesting we trade 7 to the Leafs for Nazim Kadri than you can just ***** right off (but don't really do that because your an excellent poster).

EHLERS!!

?

+++++

The Sabres better not trade for any player from The Great Satan, especially that punk.

[Weave]

3 hours ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Uh huh. Jack, Sam, and Skinner (assuming he's still here) are in their prime now. Not in 3 years. Now. Dahlin is cheap for 2 more years. The time to strike is now. I'm not suggesting trading #7 for a bag of pucks, but there are almost certainly hockey trades out there that make sense.

Glad to see you've come around.

1 hour ago, TrueBlueGED said:

 

Then I suspect you won't be frequenting this thread. 

Are you new here?

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, Weave said:

Glad to see you've come around.

Are you new here?

Same argument from 2015, now with a higher pick. Didn't work then and won't now. Our best bet is using that pick and getting it right. 

[Thorner]

6 hours ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Nobody has any idea because these trade ups really don't happen in the NHL. And in all honesty, everyone ranked 3-7 is basically the same quality this year; at least, there's enough uncertainty where it doesn't strike me as a great use of assets to move up.

So we suck because we draft poorly, and your plan is to...continue drafting because you don't think it will be done poorly? I feel like Morgan Freeman when Bruce Wayne's accountant tried to blackmail him.

You don't have to like the specific names I put out there, and Dudacek may be right that I'm undervaluing the pick, but to completely reject the concept of trading it is nuts. I was like you, once. And now I have Alex Nylander instead of Cam Fowler. The #7 pick simply isn't a pick that you refuse to trade.

We haven't drafted a useful NHL player outside the top-5 in about a decade, and just keeping all of our picks would have made us competitive? Puhlease.

Secondly, the Rangers have literally just started their rebuild. Maybe see them win some hockey games before declaring them a success story?

Uh huh. Jack, Sam, and Skinner (assuming he's still here) are in their prime now. Not in 3 years. Now. Dahlin is cheap for 2 more years. The time to strike is now. I'm not suggesting trading #7 for a bag of pucks, but there are almost certainly hockey trades out there that make sense.

???

10/10 for the reference. 

[Scottysabres]

I think we should trade the pick for a coach.

[spndnchz]

If only...

[Brawndo]

13 hours ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

I'm of the ilk that if there is truly a guy that jbot wants, maybe at 3 considering the top 2 are fairly unanimous, maybe see what it takes to trade up to 3 or 4 to guarantee you get that guy. 

What would it take to get 3 from 7, give Chicago #7 + a 2nd round, +? I don't follow draft charts so I honestly have no idea. 

The Sabres traded a 2nd and 21st overall to move up to 14 for Zemgus. 

It has been mentioned that the Kings might be interested in moving down as long as they stay in the Top Ten.

11 hours ago, CallawaySabres said:

This will hopefully be the last year for a while where the Sabres are picking in the 7 range. This is a deep draft and they are definitely getting a top 6 winger or center with this pick. We have waited this long, can't throw away young talent now. TM made that awful mistake and look where it got us. I want to make the playoffs for a decade, not 1 or 2 years.

Botterill agrees with you. He  was asked about his patience for getting to the playoffs, he mentioned he understands the frustration of the fan base but he was hired to build a team that can consistently compete for a championship, not make the playoffs for one year.

8 hours ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Nobody has any idea because these trade ups really don't happen in the NHL. And in all honesty, everyone ranked 3-7 is basically the same quality this year; at least, there's enough uncertainty where it doesn't strike me as a great use of assets to move up.

So we suck because we draft poorly, and your plan is to...continue drafting because you don't think it will be done poorly? I feel like Morgan Freeman when Bruce Wayne's accountant tried to blackmail him.

You don't have to like the specific names I put out there, and Dudacek may be right that I'm undervaluing the pick, but to completely reject the concept of trading it is nuts. I was like you, once. And now I have Alex Nylander instead of Cam Fowler. The #7 pick simply isn't a pick that you refuse to trade.

We haven't drafted a useful NHL player outside the top-5 in about a decade, and just keeping all of our picks would have made us competitive? Puhlease.

Secondly, the Rangers have literally just started their rebuild. Maybe see them win some hockey games before declaring them a success story?

Uh huh. Jack, Sam, and Skinner (assuming he's still here) are in their prime now. Not in 3 years. Now. Dahlin is cheap for 2 more years. The time to strike is now. I'm not suggesting trading #7 for a bag of pucks, but there are almost certainly hockey trades out there that make sense.

The scouting staffs that were responsible for 2010-16 are no longer employed by the Sabres. 

We will not know how Botterill’s Drafts will turn out for another year or two, but early returns on the 2017 Draft look very promising with Mittelstadt, Davidson, UPL, Laaksonen, Bryson and Weissbach. Again time will tell what happens, but Botterill has assembled a scouting staff that appears to be good at their jobs. 

Even Oloffson, Borgen have looked good in their limited NHL Time. 

In terms of trading 8th for Cam Fowler, that would have been a mistake as well. The correct move was to draft Sergachev, when Peters and Rivet are critical of the move and turn out to be right, somebody done ***** up, 

I understand where you are coming from, but there are few players I would make that move for. Huby is one of them. 

[Pimlach]

No to the trade of #7.     It’s not like we are close to having a good team.  

Fill the pipeline.  This years the #7 pick could end up a star player, maybe a big star.  Why trade that potential for a very good player?  

 

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

No to the trade of #7.     It’s not like we are close to having a good team.  

Fill the pipeline.  This years the #7 pick could end up a star player, maybe a big star.  Why trade that potential for a very good player?  

 

Impatience, the same thing that screwed us in 2015

[TrueBlueGED]

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

No to the trade of #7.     It’s not like we are close to having a good team.  

Fill the pipeline.  This years the #7 pick could end up a star player, maybe a big star.  Why trade that potential for a very good player?  

 

Nonsense. No team with a franchise center and defenseman is that far away from being good. 

17 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Impatience, the same thing that screwed us in 2015

This narrative has become nearly as obnoxious as we're bad because of the tank. 

[LGR4GM]

35 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Nonsense. No team with a franchise center and defenseman is that far away from being good. 

This narrative has become nearly as obnoxious as we're bad because of the tank. 

almost like the narrative that we can trade our way back to relevance. 

[TrueBlueGED]

56 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

almost like the narrative that we can trade our way back to relevance. 

We return to relevance by adding more good players. That can be done in a variety of ways, one of which is trading maybes for sure things. 

[Thorner]

2 hours ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Nonsense. No team with a franchise center and defenseman is that far away from being good. 

This narrative has become nearly as obnoxious as we're bad because of the tank. 

Nothing to add, just wanted this to be repeated for posterity. 

1 hour ago, TrueBlueGED said:

We return to relevance by adding more good players. That can be done in a variety of ways, one of which is trading maybes for sure things. 

Yes. It's not the idea of trading, it's about who's making the trades. Very simple. 

There's also a weird sense that comes across that it seems like people expect to go from bad to contender over night at some chosen point. "We aren't gonna win the cup next year, so.."

It's like the drastic, unhealthy opposite to the "drive for 8th" idea.

Edited April 13, 2019 by Thorny

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, TrueBlueGED said:

We return to relevance by adding more good players. That can be done in a variety of ways, one of which is trading maybes for sure things. 

7th overall is only a "maybe" if your scouting department is clueless. We need offensive talent in the pipeline. 

[TrueBlueGED]

15 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

7th overall is only a "maybe" if your scouting department is clueless. We need offensive talent in the pipeline. 

That's not true, of course. 7th overall is very much a maybe. It's more likely to produce a good player than a late first, naturally. But it's still as likely to give you Darnell Nurse or Risto as it is someone like Monahan. 

[PerreaultForever]

On 4/11/2019 at 2:38 PM, IKnowPhysics said:

More years of missing playoffs is unacceptable. 

Is it? I mean I hate it too, but this word "unacceptable" what are you or me going to do about it? You gonna switch teams if we don't  make the playoffs? Didn't think so. 

It is what it is until it isn't. Can't measure the present by the past. JBot enters year 3. In this league, now, year 3 is the measure of success or failure for a plan. We shall see. 

[Brawndo]

Circulating on Twitter earlier from Nate Geary. Nothing behind at all just a scenario that Tampa would laugh at but 

7th Overall to Tampa for Point and Callahan( one year contract dump) 

 

[TrueBlueGED]

20 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Circulating on Twitter earlier from Nate Geary. Nothing behind at all just a scenario that Tampa would laugh at but 

7th Overall to Tampa for Point and Callahan( one year contract dump) 

 

Yea, that's obviously not happening. But I do think there's an outside chance they overreact and do something kinda dumb. I don't think Yzerman would, but he's gone, and we have no idea what Brisebois is capable of. 

[dudacek]

29 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Yea, that's obviously not happening. But I do think there's an outside chance they overreact and do something kinda dumb. I don't think Yzerman would, but he's gone, and we have no idea what Brisebois is capable of. 

Keeping Point is the smartest, and therefore the most likely, move.

But what do you do if he draws a line in the sand, says I want Eichel money on a long-term deal, and digs in?

First off, there is the cap; Tampa is going to have less than $10 available to pay Point, and sign three new defenceman. Vasilevskiy, Cirelli and Sergachev are due for a new deals next summer and only Callahan is coming off the books. Miller and Gourde - the two youngest of your 8 $4.5 million+ forwards - are the only ones without no-trade clauses. What if they won’t waive?

Secondly, there’s the internal salary structure. Hedman $7.9, Stamkos $8.5 and Kucherov $9.5 all gave TB hometown discounts. What if Point isn’t interested in that? Can you give him more than any of those guys?

They need defencemen, they need grit and battle, they need cap space.

Tampa Bay will have to be looking at options. There won’t be many out there that would give them everything they need.

I wonder if something like Risto and 7 for Point and Callahan would be one?

(Personally, I think they will end up bridging Point and trade Miller and Joseph for picks and/or a cheap defenceman.)

Edited April 15, 2019 by dudacek

[Crusader1969]

On 4/13/2019 at 4:43 PM, TrueBlueGED said:

That's not true, of course. 7th overall is very much a maybe. It's more likely to produce a good player than a late first, naturally. But it's still as likely to give you Darnell Nurse or Risto as it is someone like Monahan. 

Can you list the last 10 7th overall? Think you”ll find there aren’t many “maybes” 

[Thorner]

41 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

Can you list the last 10 7th overall? Think you”ll find there aren’t many “maybes” 

We could trade the pick for a better player than any of the last 10, save Scheifele and MAYBE Dumba. 

8/10 a trade yields a better player than picking 7. I'd take those odds. 

Skinner was a 7th overall. What did we trade for him, a 2nd? I'd say trading 7th overall gets a player as good or better, and one not potentially headed for UFA, either. 

The known quantity is much less appealing than the mystery box, though. 

Edited April 16, 2019 by Thorny